Using the xy-wing noted by Hud as an example, r9c1 can't be 2 because that would make r7c3=7 and r1c1=5, which would leave r8c1 with no candidates.
With as many (2,5), (2,7), (2,9), (5,7) (7,9) pairs floating around in this grid as there are, it seems there aught to be a way to make eliminations with xy-wings just about anywhere one chooses. Or just go cross-eyed from looking, which is what happened to me. So I found even another way to solve it.
From the grid as first posted, after making eliminations in r8c19 from the (2,9) naked pair in row 8, in r9c1 from the (2,7:7,5:5,2) xy-wing use by Hud, in r4c7 from the locked candidate 5's in r8 box 6, in r4c8 from the (7,9) naked pair now in row 4, in r4c3 from the locked candidate 2's in column 3 box 7, the candidate grid looks like this:
- Code: Select all
*--------------------------------------------------*
| 25 9 3 | 27A 4 6 | 1 8 57 |
| 1 7 4 | 8 5 3 | 2 9 6 |
| 6 25 8 | 1 9 27a | 57A 4 3 |
|----------------+----------------+----------------|
| 3 25 1 | 79a 6 4 | 79A 25 8 |
| 279 6 79 | 5 8 1 | 479 3 247 |
| 8 4 579 | 3 2 79 | 6 57 1 |
|----------------+----------------+----------------|
| 4 3 27 | 6 1 5 | 8 27 9 |
| 57 8 6 | 29 3 29 | 457 1 457 |
| 59 1 259 | 4 7 8 | 3 6 25 |
*--------------------------------------------------*
Colouring on 7's shows two (A) in column 7, so (a) must be true.
Tracy